RICHARD BURR
NORTH CAROL1NA
ilnitfd ~mtE.S ~mate
WASHINGTON. DC 20510
February 6, 2012
The Honorable Julius Genachowski
Chairman
Federal Communications Commission
445lih StreetSW
Washington, DC 20554
Dear Chainnan Genachowski:
I am writing you today inquire about the potential costs associated with a recent proposal by the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The proposal, "Order on Reconsideration and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (MM Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44) would require all
television broadcast licensees to post virtually all of their public inspection files and sponsorship
identification records in an online database to be maintained and monitored by the FCC.
As I understand the proposal, the Commission would develop and maintain this database that
would host these public inspection and political file records of all 1,783 full-power commercial
and nonconunercial television stations in the United States. At the same time. it would require
all television stations to develop and maintain electronic copies of their own public inspection
file for "back-up purposes" in the event the federal database becomes "unavailable or disabled."
The proposal also requires stations to make "near real-time" uploads of political file records onto
the database even if a station is not currently transacting and tracking its political advertising
business online.
The Commission further proposes to expand its sponsorship identification requirements by
requiring stations to compile and upload to the new database a list of all sponsorship
identifications that appear on-air during broadcast programming. This is a burdensome and
unnecessary new recordkeeping requirement for stations. Although certain sponsorship
identifications currently are required to be disclosed on the air during certain programs or
advertisements, stations have never been required to create and maintain a scparate log of all
sponsorship identifications after they have been broadcast to the public or report them to the
Commission.
The Commission's proposal makes no mention of the costs associated with the creation and
ongoing maintenance that will be required with this new database. Given the unprecedcnted
volume of infonnation to be included in the database and the number of potential users, the new
database appears to be a major new undertaking of the FCC's resources and taxpayer dollars.
Equally troubling is the Commission's refusal to consider the impact of its proposal on the 78
percent of television stations that qualify as "small entities" subject to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. Imposing these likely burdensome, duplicative and costly recordkeeping requirements on
local television stations would contradict the stated view that "having the Commission host the
public file will ease the administrative burdens on all broadcasters."
0153
Although the Commission's proposal appears to create substantial new costs for both taxpayers
and small businesses, none of these costs were included in the costlbenefit analysis described in
your proposal.
In light of these concerns, I would appreciate your answer to the following questions:
I) At the time of the issuance of the Order on Reconsideration and Further Notice oj
Proposed Rlliemaking in MM Docket No. 00-168 and MM Docket No. 00-44 on October
27, 2011, what did the FCC estimate the total costs would be to the government to
implement the proposal in the first year? What did the FCC estimate the total costs to the
government to be on an annual basis thereafter?
2) What did the FCC estimate the total costs would be to the private sector to implement the
proposed regulations in the first year and each subsequent year?
3) What does the FCC identify as the average total costs to implement this proposal for both
commercial and noncommercial television stations?
4) What is the cost for the FCC to develop and maintain this new database and given its
current budget, how will it pay for this new database?
I thank you for your assistance in this matter and if I can be of any help please feel free to
canlact Waller Zaykowski, a member afmy staff, at 202-224-3 J 54.
Sincerely,
-~;---=::....~ .... rSenator Richard Burr